Words people get wrong

Wal-Mart needs to write signs in the language of its shoppers, which doesn't always mean the King's English.

den bosch wrote:

illiterutt wrote:

Been in the US a few years, and have truly yet to meet someone here who knows how to spell / pronounce 'voila'. I've seen Walla, Wha-la, Wala. Fantastic! Not seen this anywhere else.

Could it be that French is rarely if ever spoken in the states?

Possibly, but why would anyone use voila if they knew it was some 'fancy foreign word' but had no kind of idea how to spell it? I can't speak Cantonese, so I don't try to randomly throw Cantonese words into conversation. It would make me look like a twat

Possibly wrote:

den bosch wrote:

Could it be that French is rarely if ever spoken in the states?

Possibly, but why would anyone use voila if they knew it was some 'fancy foreign word' but had no kind of idea how to spell it? I can't speak Cantonese, so I don't try to randomly throw Cantonese words into conversation. It would make me look like a twat

not a grammarian wrote:

My favorite is a mute point (instead of moot). The point is unable to speak.

Favourite! Invent your own language not based on misspelt English!

How about one that actually occurs in the The Sport?

The past tense of "to lead" is "led"--NOT "lead."

It's "he LED the first three laps," not "he lead."

Another that bugs me is people's mispronunciation of "forte." If you're using it to mean "loud," then it has two syllables; but if you're using it to mean "strong point"--and I think that's its more frequent use--then it only has one. Or, in the words of the immortal George Carlin:

"Her forte [one syllable] is playing the skin flute--and she plays it forte [two syllables]!"

Similar thread:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=1768581&thread=1722539

illiterutt wrote:

Been in the US a few years, and have truly yet to meet someone here who knows how to spell / pronounce 'voila'. I've seen Walla, Wha-la, Wala.

And, of course, the ever-popular "viola."

.. wrote:

dontflushwhileyousit wrote:

The one that drives me crazy is when "humbled" is misused. It happens all the time. Every idiot on America Idol says it at least once. Pro sports players do it a lot as well. For example: "I'm humbled to be inducted into the Hall of Fame." How exactly does being recognized as one of the greatest lower your dignity.

I dont think this is misuse. Maybe they dont mean it but being put up and compared to the greats could be a humbling experience. They are basically being modest and saying they dont think that they deserve it. This is humilty.

Yes, it is a misuse. The acceptable definitions for "humbled" are as follows:

tr.v. hum·bled, hum·bling, hum·bles

1. To curtail or destroy the pride of; humiliate.

2. To cause to be meek or modest in spirit.

3. To give a lower condition or station to; abase.

Which of those could you possibly mean when you say "I am humbled by the great honor you have bestowed upon me"? The person saying such a statement may think he is showing humility, but really he is just misspeaking. In other words, what he is trying to say is not what he is really saying. I believe that is a perfect example of a misuse of language.

I see your point, but I think definition 2 is closest...what they're referring to is the fact that they're being put alongside great, legendary athletes, and that is a humbling experience (being in the company of so many greats). I think I am an okay tennis player, but if I went out to dinner with Federer and Nadal I would definitely be a lot more modest about my skill.

Should of, rather than Should have

People constantly use "ironic" to mean coincidental, which is actually pretty ironic.

'noone' instead of 'no one'

corrections wrote:

Should of, rather than Should have

This.

Also, a frequent debate I've had is "try and win the race" vs. "try to win the race." I am firmly entrenched in the latter camp, but based on how often I see the latter I fear I may be wrong.

Elitist Jerk wrote:

corrections wrote:

Should of, rather than Should have

This.

Also, a frequent debate I've had is "try and win the race" vs. "try to win the race." I am firmly entrenched in the latter camp, but based on how often I see the latter I fear I may be wrong.

No, you are correct.

kartelite wrote:

I see your point, but I think definition 2 is closest...what they're referring to is the fact that they're being put alongside great, legendary athletes, and that is a humbling experience (being in the company of so many greats). I think I am an okay tennis player, but if I went out to dinner with Federer and Nadal I would definitely be a lot more modest about my skill.

I understand what you are saying. I think it's just a case where they are using the wrong word. Here's my last attempt to explain this:

So you think you are only okay at tennis. If I suddenly put you in the same category as Federer and Nadal, you would probably feel much better about your tennis playing. You might say to yourself, "Hmmm, I didn't think I was that good, but now I see that others think I belong with the best." You would not feel humbled. You might not feel that you belong in that category with them, but saying you are humbled would not be the right word. Saying you don't deserve such praise would be acceptable. Likewise, if I am singing a song and a famous singer tells me I did a great job, I would not feel humbled. My ego would probably swell. Therefore, I strongly believe that American Idol contestants and Hall of Fame inductees are using the wrong word to express their feelings, and therefore, this is a misuse of a word that really bothers me.

^The whole point of using the word humble is to imply that their ego is NOT swelling. That is why it is exactly the right word.

Well, now that we've beaten this horse to death and stomped on the hide a few times, shall we move on?

I personally am tired of hearing people say "Asian" when (usually) they mean EAST Asian. Asia covers a lot of ground--Arabs and Persians and Israelis and Siberians (in all their flavors) and people from the Subcontinent, etc., are all Asians; if you mean just people from Japan/China/Korea, say *East* Asian. (Or--*gasp*--"Oriental," which MEANS Eastern and would eliminate a lot of potential confusion.)

I always say "Victoria Secrets"

agh wrote:

Well, now that we've beaten this horse to death and stomped on the hide a few times, shall we move on?

I personally am tired of hearing people say "Asian" when (usually) they mean EAST Asian. Asia covers a lot of ground--Arabs and Persians and Israelis and Siberians (in all their flavors) and people from the Subcontinent, etc., are all Asians; if you mean just people from Japan/China/Korea, say *East* Asian. (Or--*gasp*--"Oriental," which MEANS Eastern and would eliminate a lot of potential confusion.)

This is like saying that it's wrong to call a sedan a vehicle. Using a less specific word isn't wrong. Despite the fact that not all Asians are East Asian, all East Asians are Asian.

you dont wanna confuse your chinks with your pakis